Guest geniusMoment Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I have to be honest with you if I heard tomorrow that vince and steph died in a plane crash I would be happy. It's not an unintelligent thing to say, maybe it means you are an asshole. Its just how I would feel.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 If you hate them that much then don't watch the product they put out
Guest Dangerous A Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 If you hate them that much then don't watch the product they put out Correctemundo!!! Bob Barron wins the "Common Sense post of the day"! ::presents trophy::
Guest IB2BLACK Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Hey genius, it's just wrestling. It's not real. no need to wish death on a character on a TV show.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Death is one thing. Temporary loss of voice, now..I could go with that.
Guest My Eyebrow is on fire Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 If you hate them that much then don't watch the product they put out How's about you raise yourself off vince's dick - he's a billionaire and doesn't need you to defend him.
Guest bob_barron Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Where did I say I was defending Vince? If you hate Stephanie and Vince so much then why do you continue to watch or take interest in WWE?
Guest Dangerous A Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 If you hate them that much then don't watch the product they put out How's about you raise yourself off vince's dick - he's a billionaire and doesn't need you to defend him. He's not defending Vince. He's saying if you feel that you need to wish death upon the creative force of a television show you need to watch something else.
Guest saturnmark4life Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I hate Vince and Steph, but I like wrestling and quite a lot of the talent in WWE, so I'm still going to watch it. If Vince VS stephanie headlined every PPV and was the subject of every show, obviously I wouldn't take an interest in WWE. Just because I hate them, why should I ignore all the wrestlers they employ?
Guest JMA Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I don't wish death on anybody--least of all the McMahons. That's a little harsh and Ann Coulter-esque. I just wish the McMahons were OUT of WWE--well, maybe keep Shane (if he stops liking Test).
Guest Goodear Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Imagine if you would (if you have a job) walking into your boss's office one day. And then telling him or her that they should quit because they can't do the job right... Now imagine yourself at the unemployment line.
Guest El Psycho Diablo Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Imagine if you would (if you have a job) walking into your boss's office one day. And then telling him or her that they should quit because they can't do the job right... Now imagine yourself at the unemployment line. Except in this case, we're not his employees. We're his fans..customers..that he's blantantly ignoring (and seemingly trying to piss off). It took the returns of the two biggest stars of the last decade to get the Raw rating above 4. That's PATHETIC. They used to listen to their fans..when they were successful. Now that they're down, they hate our guts. Smart? Hell no. Common sense tells that you LISTEN to your fanbase, and adjust accordingly. When they start losing the hardcore fans, that's bad. But..common sense isn't all that common, is it?
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Oh yeah, Paul really stands up to the MchMahons alright...like when he let them whore his company out, or when he went along with them on ideas like HLA and the Corpse Fucking....oh wait. That's Paul, defender of the righteous, savior of the weak!
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Yes, because Heyman sure did stand up about the big show. And about Al Wilson. And about the Gay Wedding. And about booking Angle as a pussy. Okay I don't know if this was already addressed, but last time I heard he did push against those things. Heyman wanted Benoit not Big Show.
Guest Brian Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Yes, Heyman always looks good doesn't he? But when bad things happen, the blame gets shoved elsewhere.
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I'm not saying he's perfect, but from what we hear he's the one pushing for the better guys than the ones that end up being pushed. Makes you wonder how much power he ever had in the first place.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Yes, because Heyman sure did stand up about the big show. And about Al Wilson. And about the Gay Wedding. And about booking Angle as a pussy. Okay I don't know if this was already addressed, but last time I heard he did push against those things. Heyman wanted Benoit not Big Show. Yep, Paul had absolutley nothing to do with the central angles of his show! Of course! Who was it that made him push Show instead of Benoit? Dunn, Ace, Vince? Does it even matter? Reading some of the reactions around here, we could start our Heyman mad-lib, I think. "Most fans were not happy with the (insert terrible angle here) segment that aired last night. Heyman, especially, was angered by the decision and fought against it but was eventually overruled by (insert one of the usual scape-goats here)." - Heyman's House Organs.
Guest Goodear Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Except in this case, we're not his employees. We're his fans..customers..that he's blantantly ignoring (and seemingly trying to piss off). It took the returns of the two biggest stars of the last decade to get the Raw rating above 4. That's PATHETIC. They used to listen to their fans..when they were successful. Now that they're down, they hate our guts. Smart? Hell no. Common sense tells that you LISTEN to your fanbase, and adjust accordingly. When they start losing the hardcore fans, that's bad. But..common sense isn't all that common, is it? You're assuming that Paul Heyman is the voice of the fans. He's not. I'm guessing if you poled the average WWE fan as they entered an arena that they wouldn't really care all that much about Steph and Triple H's relationship. If you want to make the case that Heyman is completely in tune with the fans... I give you Justin Credible.
Guest Brian Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Considering four of the SmackDown six were used as fodder to get over Angle and Benoit, Benoit was sacrificed for Angle (even though it did get him over there were no long-term affects or plans), and Angle to Brock, the cruiserweight division in worse shape then before (the non-sensical Kidman reign), how much booking did he do to help out the little guys. Especially since he basically gave out the TV stuff with little build or long-term impact.
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Except in this case, we're not his employees. We're his fans..customers..that he's blantantly ignoring (and seemingly trying to piss off). It took the returns of the two biggest stars of the last decade to get the Raw rating above 4. That's PATHETIC. They used to listen to their fans..when they were successful. Now that they're down, they hate our guts. Smart? Hell no. Common sense tells that you LISTEN to your fanbase, and adjust accordingly. When they start losing the hardcore fans, that's bad. But..common sense isn't all that common, is it? You're assuming that Paul Heyman is the voice of the fans. He's not. I'm guessing if you poled the average WWE fan as they entered an arena that they wouldn't really care all that much about Steph and Triple H's relationship. If you want to make the case that Heyman is completely in tune with the fans... I give you Justin Credible. Justin Credible?? Justin Credible was nonexistent for months what is your point? Most fans wouldn't care about HHH/Steph's relationship because they don't understand what impact it has. Most of Heyman's ideas about pushes have not been used. Matt Hardy was passed over in favor of A-Train. Benoit was passed over for Big Show. Steph is still the head of the booking team I blame her for some of that stuff.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 "I'm not saying he's perfect, but from what we hear he's the one pushing for the better guys than the ones that end up being pushed." And who do we hear that from? Paul's mouth piece, Dave Schemer, or one of the other Rah Rah Heyman members of 1wrestling? The Torch Crew guys like Powell who claim he "appreciates the Cruisers" while ignoring Paul's burriel of Hardy, Noble, Rey, and the DeMott push? How about Meltzer, who gave Paul "booker of the year" for Smackdown in 2002, even though it dropped more in the ratings than Raw? Consider that all of the those web sites comunicate with Paul on a regular basis, and now does it make more sense? Obviously Heyman is going to tell them things from his point of view, and obviously he's going to try to shift the blame for terrible segments, poor ratings, or both. It's Heyman's game, and he's played it for years, all the way back to ECW where he would be feeding excuses to Schemer so that he didn't look bad. This is just Paul being Paul. "Makes you wonder how much power he ever had in the first place." So I guess that means he doesn't get the credit for all those critically-acclaimed Smackdown tag matches, then?
Guest Goodear Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Justin Credible's title reign for ECW was basically the final nail in the coffin for the company. But yet, Paul booked him to the moon in back for some unfathomable reason. Yet, old Paul never put that title on the over for years RVD. These are not the actions of someone who listens to the fans.
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Justin Credible's title reign for ECW was basically the final nail in the coffin for the company. But yet, Paul booked him to the moon in back for some unfathomable reason. Yet, old Paul never put that title on the over for years RVD. These are not the actions of someone who listens to the fans. I'm just talking about his WWE run.
Guest Goodear Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 What... he's not the same person anymore?
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 I'm not saying he's not the same person. We're just analyzing what he's done in the WWE right now is what I'm saying.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Seeing as he's ignored my last two posts, I think you should be honored that he even bothered with that excuse.
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 What excuse? In THIS thread we are analyzing his WWE work. The only reason I questioned the Justin Credible thing was because I thought we were talking about WWE. I didn't ignore your posts I just don't have anything to say.
Guest JMA Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Don't remind of Justin Credible. *Shudders* Still, while Heyman has been running SD! things have been better. And I don't give a damn if you hate Heyman because of ECW things. That company is over. I'm just glad someone is finally telling Vince the truth. He needs less yes-men.
Guest RickyChosyu Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Don't remind of Justin Credible. *Shudders* Still, while Heyman has been running SD! things have been better. And I don't give a damn if you hate Heyman because of ECW things. That company is over. I'm just glad someone is finally telling Vince the truth. He needs less yes-men. I wonder what Paul would say to the accusation that it's a conflict of interest to have himself booked all over the TV show that he writes for. Paul has been just as active at booking meatings as anyone. He doesn't "stand up" to the MchMahons, he contributes to their madness. Do Smackdown's improvements include Big Show main-eventing? How about the Al Wilson angle? Brian Kendrick streaking? How about the complete disinterest in the "Smackdown Six" who were supposed to be getting big pushes as part of the tag division instead of being thrown out there a la Tajiri/Crazy? Does it's improvement also include falling in the ratings more than Raw and failing to make any progress in viewers?
LaParkaYourCar Posted March 7, 2003 Report Posted March 7, 2003 Smackdown has been a lot more watchable since he's been writing. And what do you mean losing more ratings than RAW? I thought Smackdown has been holding steady while RAW has been plummeting? How do you know these things aren't Steph's fault?
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now